or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Motorola Xoom also targeted in Apple lawsuit in Europe
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Motorola Xoom also targeted in Apple lawsuit in Europe - Page 2

post #41 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.

Edge to Edge glass isn't unique to apple, it's not unique to Tablets. I don't know who came up with the idea to go edge to edge, but I know the concept existed before the iphone, even if a device didn't ship with it yet (though it might've)

Also, most tablets pre-ipad were Resistive Screens, not capacitive, which heavily influences design choices. Having a bezel with that kinda screen is practically a requirement.

Here's a tablet prototype idea from 1994: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI

Yes, it has a bezel. again, Resistive screen. Edge to edge glass is a new development but it's not something that's "unique" to the ipad. (side note, the video is amazing with how forward thinking that video is). It's a black thin slab, with rounded corners with a huge screen on the front.

the xoom has a totally different form factor, different screen resolution, different texture, non-unibody design, different LCD tech, but because it doesn't have a bezel it's copying the ipad?
post #42 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.

In this case function dictates form. Tablets are 90% screen which leaves very few aesthetic choices to make. They are all going to look similar.

Remember the HP Slate, shown to the public before the original iPad but still managed to look very similar to what Apple would later revealed, not because one company was copying the other's design but because all tablets are going to look similar.
post #43 of 68
As far as I know, the Apple complaint leading to the injunction on Samsung was submitted in German. Has someone here read an English translation from front to back so as to warrant the passion shown here? Or are there many German speakers in the US, the country known for multilingualism (cough cough).
post #44 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

So anyone can duplicate Jonny Ive's designs, change a couple of details, and it's okay?

Which Ive design has Motorola copied?

And Crunchpad and HP Slate presented before the first iPad looked exactly like an iPad
post #45 of 68
Reading these articles is such a breeze since I updated my Ignore list! Quite a few in the few months that I have been around.
post #46 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Are RIM and HP selling their respective tablets in Europe?

Of course, there is a market outside the US mate.
post #47 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I originally thought Apple was concerned with Samsung copying look and feel too closely. Now it looks like simply producing a tablet may attract Apple's lawyers.

Sorry, but in my view this looks more and more like Apple intends to litigate itself to an untouchable market presence. The bigger they're getting the more dangerous they're looking to me. Until they lose one or more of these ("look and feel"?) lawsuits, anyone who wants to build a smartphone or tablet needs to allow for lots of legal fees no matter how little it actually looks like an Apple product.


I agree, it;s totally out of hand. You can rant on about Apple defending their IP all day - this isn't about that. It's about controlling the market through litigation and the threat of litigation.

If you were a small company trying to launch a product you would be cooked, as you would spend all of your balance on this crap. It will have to end with a review of the US patent system ,as it;s a farce. It's now just a stick for big companied to beat people over the head with. Apple recognised this early and got in first on loads of products - but that doesn't make it right.

They are looking worse and worse as this goes on. Seriously, look and feel? If they don't sue RIM and HP then this is all about Google and fear of Samsungs products - and nothing at all to do with IP.
post #48 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Edge to Edge glass isn't unique to apple, it's not unique to Tablets. I don't know who came up with the idea to go edge to edge, but I know the concept existed before the iphone, even if a device didn't ship with it yet (though it might've)

It certainly isn't and I believe the first place i saw it was on Sony laptops, but that's neither here nor there. There's no requirement on a design patent or community design that the individual elements be novel, the only requirement is that the combination of elements is.

Sony for example have gone with two tablet designs, one a double screen folding device and the other where the edge to edge screen surface actually extends to the back. Sony's devices use that design element, but they add enough new elements that they clearly don't infringe - and that's as much because Sony wants a significantly differentiated aesthetic as for legal reasons.

You may be right that the Xoom is sufficiently different to pass muster, you may also be wrong - apple is entitled to take the view that it doesn't until the court says otherwise. Apple doesn't appear to have gone for a preliminary injunction against the Xoom which may indicate that they are less confident than against the Galaxy 10.1.
post #49 of 68
The minimal design of the iPad is simply utilitarian IMO. How much does another tablet need to differ not to "copy" it? Apparently significantly different dimensions don't cut it. Does adding a chrome trim or changing the color change it enough combined with the dimension differences?

Related to that, this video is worth a well worth a view. All about an industry where copying is not only common but blatant. Yet the industry thrives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0

Be sure to watch at least the first 5 minutes and from the 13-15 minute mark before tuning out. You're really not that busy.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #50 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post

In this case function dictates form. Tablets are 90% screen which leaves very few aesthetic choices to make. They are all going to look similar.

Remember the HP Slate, shown to the public before the original iPad but still managed to look very similar to what Apple would later revealed, not because one company was copying the other's design but because all tablets are going to look similar.

The argument that they're all going to look similar would be much stronger if in fact they actually did all look similar. Since they don't it's rather weak. The reason that you think they all have too look similar is because many manufacturers have consciously or unconsciously been copying the iPads aesthetics.
post #51 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

The argument that they're all going to look similar would be much stronger if in fact they actually did all look similar. Since they don't it's rather weak. The reason that you think they all have too look similar is because many manufacturers have consciously or unconsciously been copying the iPads aesthetics.

Yet those differences don't keep Apple from using their near-unlimited resources to attack any competitor who might have any possibility of getting traction. It's great to see that Apple's found a use for all those billions they've saved up.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #52 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

The argument that they're all going to look similar would be much stronger if in fact they actually did all look similar. Since they don't it's rather weak. The reason that you think they all have too look similar is because many manufacturers have consciously or unconsciously been copying the iPads aesthetics.

It's your own fault if you create a design so minimalistic, that in an instant it became more or less the archetype for tablets. "Patenting" a archetype-design is a monopoly, because most of us find the archetype to be the "best".
post #53 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

The argument that they're all going to look similar would be much stronger if in fact they actually did all look similar. Since they don't it's rather weak. The reason that you think they all have too look similar is because many manufacturers have consciously or unconsciously been copying the iPads aesthetics.

The iPad wasn't the first having this design and aesthetics
post #54 of 68
I don't really post on this board much, few times before but this time it is a bit too much. I totally agree with samsung case, either the tab or the S and S2 but Xoom, I see no resemblance whatsoever.

Everyone keeps saying that there are plethora of ways to design a tablet and clearly Xoom is one of them and iPad is the other. They are far-removed, like cousins that are not even aware they are cousins. Big fan of Apple, can't stand android past a week but suing Xoom, really. Apple just annoys me for the first time.
post #55 of 68
It looks like EU IP system is just as screwed up as that of US(USPTO).

It looks like germany is to EU what texas is to US when it comes to bogus IP lawsuits.

How bad EU system is? read the following

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/Th..._USPTO_Was_Bad

It looks like the only way to not "blatantly copy" apple is to design a spherical device with a spherical screen and buttons either in a spherical shape or in an "X" shape.

Anybody smell $$$$$?,Quick, somebody should go to germany and start filing up devices with above mentioned dimensions.
post #56 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The minimal design of the iPad is simply utilitarian IMO. How much does another tablet need to differ not to "copy" it? Apparently significantly different dimensions don't cut it. Does adding a chrome trim or changing the color change it enough combined with the dimension differences?

Related to that, this video is worth a well worth a view. All about an industry where copying is not only common but blatant. Yet the industry thrives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0

Be sure to watch at least the first 5 minutes and from the 13-15 minute mark before tuning out. You're really not that busy.

Interesting presentation, but I think we have to be careful when applying rules that work well in one domain to another. If Samsung were operating in the fashion industry then its business simply would't work because it would be making very close copies of say a Prada design, at a similar level of build quality and at a similar price. But no fashionista would ever buy such a product, in fact they'd be less likely to buy any product from a firm that operated in such a way - because those firms would be fundamentally unfashionable.

It may not be possible for Samsung to be as visually distinct from Apple as Prada is from Gucci, but I don't think there's any proof yet that this is so. Sony seems to be managing it.
post #57 of 68
Wow. Thanks for that link Daftari. The AI article implies this has to do with patent claims against Samsung, when it's apparently nothing of the sort. Looks like a system ripe for abuse.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/Th..._USPTO_Was_Bad
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #58 of 68
I can understand the lawsuite against Samsung, as the Galazy was a blatent knock-off. The motorola Xoom, on the other hand - I'm not a fan of Android tablets (and the only good thing Motorola has ever done is the 68k CPU architecture) but I think Apple may be going a bit OTT with a filling against Motorola. I am only taking this at face value, however. I have not read the specifics of the claim as of yet.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #59 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stupidhero View Post

It's your own fault if you create a design so minimalistic, that in an instant it became more or less the archetype for tablets. "Patenting" a archetype-design is a monopoly, because most of us find the archetype to be the "best".

Perhaps Samsung didn't copy Apple

post #60 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by daftari View Post

It looks like EU IP system is just as screwed up as that of US(USPTO).

It looks like germany is to EU what texas is to US when it comes to bogus IP lawsuits.

How bad EU system is? read the following

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/Th..._USPTO_Was_Bad

It looks like the only way to not "blatantly copy" apple is to design a spherical device with a spherical screen and buttons either in a spherical shape or in an "X" shape.

Anybody smell $$$$$?,Quick, somebody should go to germany and start filing up devices with above mentioned dimensions.

Interesting link but that particular post neglects a salient point (insofar as I can tell from a quick read) - this is only a preliminary injunction. If the ruling in the actual court proceedings goes against Apple, they may have to pay substantial damages to Samsung. This is the risk stopping companies (large or small) from excessively abusing the system (although *excessive* is a subjective characterization).
post #61 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Interesting link but that particular post neglects a salient point (insofar as I can tell from a quick read) - this is only a preliminary injunction. If the ruling in the actual court proceedings goes against Apple, they may have to pay substantial damages to Samsung. This is the risk stopping companies (large or small) from excessively abusing the system (although *excessive* is a subjective characterization).

The point though is that they filed this injunction in the EU's version of "patent Troll county" (we have the east district of texas) and they filed it 1) without informing samsung (and I'm assuming motorola) and 2) because of number 1, it was basically a one sided case.
post #62 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

The point though is that they filed this injunction in the EU's version of "patent Troll county" (we have the east district of texas) and they filed it 1) without informing samsung (and I'm assuming motorola) and 2) because of number 1, it was basically a one sided case.

I don't automatically side with Apple on every issue; however, this instance illustrates that the Samsung legal team was ill-prepared. They should have seen this coming after what happened in Australia.
post #63 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post

... and the only good thing Motorola has ever done is the 68k CPU architecture ...

That's all, really?

What about the world first walkie-talkie? The first cell phone? Quantitative quality management system? A pioneer in transistor design at one point, too .... All of this impresses you less than the 68000 - one of a number of CISC microprocessors?
post #64 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

That's all, really?

What about the world first walkie-talkie? The first cell phone? Quantitative quality management system? A pioneer in transistor design at one point, too .... All of this impresses you less than the 68000 - one of a number of CISC microprocessors?

It's a really nice assembly language though - compared to a horror like x86 it's a joy.
post #65 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Wow. Thanks for that link Daftari. The AI article implies this has to do with patent claims against Samsung, when it's apparently nothing of the sort. Looks like a system ripe for abuse.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/Th..._USPTO_Was_Bad

+1.

That certainly is an interesting article. Be sure to read the comments from the IPprofessional, some dude that works on IP and knows stuff how PI work.

The article lead me to a 13 minute youtube clip showing a tablet from 1994. Never produced though.

Knight-Rider, Inc. from Boulder, CO (I kitt you not)
post #66 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The minimal design of the iPad is simply utilitarian IMO. How much does another tablet need to differ not to "copy" it? Apparently significantly different dimensions don't cut it. Does adding a chrome trim or changing the color change it enough combined with the dimension differences?

Related to that, this video is worth a well worth a view. All about an industry where copying is not only common but blatant. Yet the industry thrives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0

Be sure to watch at least the first 5 minutes and from the 13-15 minute mark before tuning out. You're really not that busy.

Wow! Another good info. I like 'The Virtues of Copying' @ 7'00''
post #67 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0

Be sure to watch at least the first 5 minutes and from the 13-15 minute mark before tuning out. You're really not that busy.

If you are busy you can scroll through the pdf:
http://www.learcenter.org/pdf/TEDxBlakley.pdf
post #68 of 68

To update another slow-moving suit thru the German courts, it's being reported today that Apple's attempts to ban the Xoom tablet (why bother?) will probably fail, and Apple predictably isn't happy.

 

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-06-05/apple-will-probably-lose-german-motorola-mobility-xoom-case

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Motorola Xoom also targeted in Apple lawsuit in Europe